Swine Flu – A Global Pandemic Not Many Dead

I don’t think that I am given to ostrich like tendencies and burying my head in the sand is not my usual adopted position. However I can’t get excited about the current outbreak of Swine Flu. The media would have us believe that millions of us are all about to catch this dreaded lurgy and hundreds and thousands of us will be dying in the streets. RUBBISH!!

The truth, as far as I can see, is that some several hundreds of people in this country will suffer a varying degree of flu like symptoms. Some, the very young, the very old, the weak and the infirm may die (or may have their demise hastened by this additional complication). Why then are we being subjected to this mass propaganda campaign? Could it just be that the newspapers and broadcast media have decided that we are tired of hearing about the economy and they now need a new story to try and capture our attention?

Cyclists – Just A Whining Nuisance

This blog is not actually about cyclists. That particular bunch of the “don’t pay as you go” lobby still annoy the hell out of me and do, as it happens, fall into the group I want to rant at today.

The reason for my ire is simply that; post an opinion that cyclist, by slowing down traffic and refusing to pay for the infrastructure they demand to use, are selfish parasites, and up they spring to defend themselves. Point out, on the other hand, that many of our fundamental rights to law and liberty have been stealthily stolen by the Central Soviet you call a government and NOTHING, Nada, Zilch, Zero, happens!

Where are the commentators who want to discuss issues of import rather than bloody bicycles for God’s sake? Jade Goody, Amy Winehouse, Footballers who can’t keep it in their pants or dowdy spinsters who can sing a bit, all manage to arouse fervour and passion from the Great “actually we once used to be, but aren’t any more so deal with it” British Public. Is the whole country so ego centric and self absorbed that the only things we now hold dear are those things which, quite frankly, only amount to navel gazing?

And talking of human rights; how can this excuse for a government possibly justify its treatment of the Ghurkha ex-servicemen? Having lost out to a High Court judgement they have set about a shameful, mean and beggarly so called compliance, which will deny these brave warriors who served to support the freedoms (and expenses) they all so lavishly claim, the right to a dignified retirement in the country they fought for.

I have always believed that “with rights, come responsibilities”. In the case of the Ghurkhas I believe that they have faced up to and faithfully discharged their responsibilities, now they deserve the rights they have, in many cases, fought and died for.

Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? (Who Will Watch The Watchers?)

As anyone who knows me, or has read any of my blogs, will attest, I could hardly be described as a ‘bleeding heart liberal’. In fact the phrase “well to the right of Genghis Kahn” I take as a compliment. I am however increasingly worried by the continuing erosion of fundamental elements of our civil liberties, which we all used to believe were our inalienable right.

Today all 12 suspects arrested in a security operation intended to thwart what the Prime Minister said was “a very big terrorist plot” have been released without charge. These arrests were, you may remember, precipitated by Scotland Yard’s head of counter-terrorism's accidental disclosure of details of proposed raids, by exposing a secret and confidential dossier.

This is not the first time that so called terrorists have been spectacularly arrested only to be later released, much more quietly. It seems that in the name of “The War On Terror” the age old adage of “Innocent Until Proven Guilty” has been replaced by “Innocent Until Proven Pakistani”. The sacrificing of our rights to the god of the war on terror is, sadly, only the tip of what I believe to be a disturbing murky iceberg.

I believe that this Socialist, Central Soviet, government, formally of comrade Blair (or B. Liar as he should more accurately be known) and currently headed (I can’t bring myself to say “lead”) by  tovarich Brown, has steadily steered us down a path toward a Stalinist police state.

Presumably fuelled by its insatiable desire to control every aspect of every individual’s life (and thought processes if they believed that they could get away with it), rights and freedoms we have enjoyed for almost a thousand years have quietly disappeared from the statute book.

Gone are the days when you had the right to remain silent. When you did stay ‘schtum’ British law was very clear that just because you did not say anything your silence could not be construed as guilt. This was because the burden of proof was always on the prosecution; so I did not have to prove my innocence, it was always assumed. Today judges can direct a jury to assume exactly the opposite and a failure to testify can be assumed as guilt. There used also to be the right of Habeaus Corpus. Now the police can kick your door down at 4:00am and hold you without charge for 28 days (remember the government wanted this to be 56 days). It appears that no needs any actual hard evidence to do this as you can be released, after this period, without charge, as in today’s case. When you are released the police don’t even have to say they're sorry, nor apparently do they have to justify locking you up in the first place, beyond saying that it “was in the interest of national security”.

If the police did have a valid reason for arresting these young men why, now that they have been released, can we not see it? Whatever happened to the concept of “wrongful arrest” (itself a crime)?

It is becoming clear to me that the police are increasingly acting as an arm of the government, who are arming them with powers to ride roughshod over the rights of the individual. Even opposition shadow cabinet ministers are not exempt. Armed with such powers the police themselves seem to be taking a stance of not being our guardians but our warders. Flushed with their seemingly limitless power, and the fact they are divorced from any consequences, they appear to be operating from the view that “everyone is guilty and we will catch you eventually”. They also feel empowered to physically attack protestors, or anyone else for that matter, willy-nilly, again without consequence.

When servants become masters in this way I suggest that there is something fundamentally wrong with our society. I believe that people should not be afraid of their government, or their police force, the government, or the police, should always be afraid of their people. Our rights and freedoms give us the ability to exercise our power over our government and police force and we should all be afraid when they are, taken away from us.

Comments - Come One Come All

 I’m pleased to see some comments on this old blogspot.

The main point I want to make is that my comments and opinions are my own and I don’t expect everyone, or anyone, to agree with them, neither am I in the business of proselytising. The main purpose of this avenue of publication is provide me with an outlet to say the kinds of things which our increasingly politically correct society attempts to deny me.

Please do feel free to comment – for or against- and, provided they are not obscene, or illegal I’ll happily publish them.

One thing I would say about comment is that I don’t appreciate those who choose to take the cowards option of pontificating for the safety of anonymity. If you have an opinion at least be brave enough to “sign-up” to it.

In answer to Kirsten comments on “Sod Your Bike – Mind My Car!:

Yes Kirsten you are correct I am “quite angry”. I am also somewhat surprised by the naivety of your arguments in support of the parasitic lycra clad loonies infesting our fair highways and byways . You state:

“Cyclists pay for the roads - and cycle paths - via income tax and council tax, just like everyone else.” So, are the people who don’t have cycles and are paying the same taxes as cyclists subsidising them? If so why should they? You could, by this argument also state that the group who don’t have a car or a bike are subsidising both, howeveras the motorists ARE paying it’s the cyclists who are getting all the freebies.

“as bikes cause so little wear and tear on the roads, you could argue that actually cyclists are paying far more than their fair share of road costs”
My point was not about ‘wear and tear’ but about the amount of congestion and consequent pollution cyclists cause by clogging up an infrastructure they do not directly contribute toward.

“Are you going to argue that "green" cars should be banned from the roads because they're zero-rated too? “
No – only that they should bear the burden like the rest of us. If you really want to know what I think of the militant Green lobby see my blog http://mistermerlin.blogspot.com/2008/08/eco-warriors-please-dont-represent-me.html

“cyclists are on the road as of right, as are pedestrians and horse-riders.”
With rights come responsibilities. My argument is for cyclists to shoulder their share of their responsibilities not just expect the car drivers to pay for them.

“Roads were actually built to facilitate easier cycling, long before the nation became obsessed with cars.”
I think you will find that history shows that the practical modern cycle and the motor car are virtually contemporary. I’m not sure if you proposition can by supported by the facts? Cycling has almost always been a leisure activity rather than one of the great drivers of commerce and it is the generation of wealth and investment brought about by the motor car which, I would contend, has lead to (and paid for) the development of better, mettled roads.

“As for your remarks about accidents - do you know how many pedestrians have been killed in collisions with cyclists in recent years? Less than 10, and there's nothing to say the cyclist was at fault in all of them, no matter what your own prejudices. Do you know how many pedestrians are killed by cars on the pavement? More than 10 a week. There is a killer on the roads, but it's not cyclists.”
My point was not about the number of accidents caused by either side but that fact that cyclists seem to be increasingly immune from the consequences of their actions. You may note that I only argued for a ban on cyclists “until they are forced into obeying the rules like the rest of us (motorists) and, more importantly, are made to pay for their privilege of sharing the roads with us “

As for my prejudices I am please to say that they remain my own. 

Okay - So I'm Now Officially Old

Okay, so maybe it is me and I am officially getting old. The problem seems to be that I am increasingly at odds with the current manifestations of modern society. Don’t get me wrong, I’m still pretty computer savvy and fairly techno-literate, I like to think that I have a reasonable grasp of current events, politics and the current economic disaster that is Labour party politics. It’s just that as soon as I turn on my television, or radio, I seem to be seeing and hearing a picture of a society that I no longer recognise.

Firstly I no longer agree with what I perceive to be the modern interpretation or definition of “celebrity”. As I said in an earlier Blog, I believe that there is a definite distinction between the modern concepts of celebrity and, what I believe used to be called fame. With fame, those people who are acknowledged, and indeed may be lauded, for their talent and/or abilities should always have a place in our society. Those who contribute to politics, the arts, science, sport or entertainment etc. deserve recognition, acclimation and applause. For me the problem is that we are now deluged with an increasing raft of people who appear to be “famous” for no more than being famous. What have these people actually done; what is their achievement; where is the evidence of their having paid their dues to the actual effort of learning their craft or profession?

Which leads me on to “The Apprentice”; I’m sorry, but I just don’t get it. From the little I have seen of this sorry excuse for a so called ‘Entertainment’ program is filled with a pathetic bunch of sad “Wannabes” who think that they are “Already-ares”. I thought the whole concept of an apprentice was of someone who wanted to learn the skills of the master, i.e. someone who was prepared, in humility, to acknowledge their ignorance in order to be taught. What I seem to be seeing is a bunch of people who want to demonstrate that they already know it all and that they are better than the other know –it-alls against which they are competing. For me this program is not about who would make the best apprentice, it’s about who has the greater hubris. What I don’t understand is, when did hubris become a virtue?

The second thing that is exercising my mind at the moment is the total erosion of our civil liberties. Those who know me, even a little will testify that I am not, by any means, a bleeding heart liberal. I am however at a loss to understand how we have arrived at a state where the police can kick down anyone’s door at 4 a.m.  and then be incarcerated for 28 days without, apparently, any evidence of any crime or offence having been committed. Over the last couple of years literally hundreds of people have suffered this trauma, all in the name of the fight against terrorism. Then they have been released without charge. I find this confusing. If the police or the intelligence services believed that these people were guilty of an offence then surely they should have been charged and prosecuted. If, after 28 days the authorities have failed to find any evidence of wrongdoing then surely we should be told what the evidence was that caused them to act in the first place? What happened to the concept of “wrongful arrest”?

I know that we can’t turn the clock back and all go and live in St. Mary Meade next door to Miss Marple but can’t these excessive swings of the social pendulum be addressed and adjusted?